Winifred Hodge Rose
Foresight
In his book The Well and the Tree, Bauschatz argues that the concept of ‘the future’ was ambiguous in old Heathen understanding of how the world works. (I discuss this further in my article Time, Tense, and the Norns.) It had less of a grip on their thoughts than did ‘the past’ and ‘the present,’ and its significance was of a lesser order, largely because the future is less known than the past is and has less ‘weight’ to it in terms of shaping the present. Even so, it’s clear that the ability to foresee the future played an important role both in everyday life and in dramatic moments captured in sagas, tales, and myths, showing that the concept of ‘the future’ had its own significant place in ancient Heathen worldviews.
Both in real life and in tales, sagas, and myths, the wise-woman, seeress, völva, or spákona played an important role in Heathen society with her ability to discern and foretell the future (there were men who practiced this skill as well, though fewer). The Völuspá is a prime example: the dead seeress in this Old Norse poem is called forth temporarily from her afterlife by Odin’s command. She begins her account at the very beginning of the Worlds, before anything exists, and continues into the future, to Ragnarök and past it into Worlds reconfigured after the Muspell-conflagration. Implied in Norse poetry and myth is that Odin is influenced by this foreknowledge and shapes his deeds accordingly.
The same is true for deeds of Frigg. In Baldr’s Dreams, included in the Poetic Edda, the Æsir learn about Baldr’s forthcoming death from another seeress. In response to this foreknowledge, Frigg fared about the Worlds and “received solemn promises so that Baldr should not be harmed by fire and water, iron and all kinds of metal, stones, the earth, trees, diseases, the animals, the birds, poison, snakes,” except, unfortunately, she missed getting a promise from the mistletoe (Sturlason, prose Edda, p. 48). Odin responded differently: he took steps to father another son who would avenge Baldr’s death (Baldr’s Dreams v. 10-11.)
Foreknowledge spurred Odin and Frigg to undertake mighty deeds in an attempt to forestall or mitigate the dire orlog that was impending, but as we know from the myths, what was foreseen did indeed come to pass, in the case of Baldr’s death. In the case of Ragnarök, perhaps it has already happened as some modern Heathens believe, and / or perhaps it is still pending, but it looms there, a vast presence on the horizon of ‘the future.’
Looking at foresight from a human perspective, here is a description from Chapter 4 of The Saga of Erik the Red, which provides a wonderfully detailed description of an itinerant Icelandic spákona or seeress and her work of foretelling. The seeress Thorbjorg has come to a neighborhood that has been suffering from both epidemic illness and dearth, or lack of sufficient food and other resources needed for survival. The worried residents all gather at the farmstead where Thorbjorg is hosted for a traditional oracular ceremony. After elaborately detailed preliminaries, including preparing a high seat for her, she speaks with the local spirits during the ceremony and then announces: “now are many things clear to me which before were hidden both from me and others. And I am able this to say, that the dearth will last no longer, the season improving as spring advances. The epidemic of fever which has long oppressed us will disappear quicker than we could have hoped.” Thorbjorg next foresees for the woman who has helped with the ceremony, saying “…there shall arise from thee a line of descendants both numerous and goodly, and over the branches of thy family shall shine a bright ray.” And “afterwards the men went to the wise-woman, and each enquired after what he was most curious to know. She was also liberal of her replies, and what she said proved true.”
Here is an account of how influential divination of the future was among the Germanic tribes, more than a thousand years earlier than Erik the Red:
“In 58 BC Caesar was puzzled that Ariovistus, King of the Suebi, would not engage in battle until he discovered the following from prisoners: ‘Among the Germans there was a custom that their matres familia [the wives of the heads of household] declared on the basis of lots and prophecies whether battle might usefully be joined or not; and they had said that it was not fated for the Germans to win if they joined battle before the new moon.’ Caesar, Gallic war, 1.50.” (quoted in Dowden p. 253, brackets his.)
Divination about the future as well as other hidden matters was so widely practiced among all the Germanic peoples, both during Heathen times and after official conversion, that I won’t attempt to describe it in any detail, just mention it as evidence that ‘the future’ was certainly of interest to them. Divination was practiced in numerous ways, using rune-casting, dreams, oracular work, and innumerable folk-customs like washing one’s face in the morning dew on May Day to see the face of one’s future husband.
A good way to seek for traces of Heathen customs is to look at the old laws and ‘penitentials’ of the early Christian churches in Heathen lands, which give lists of Heathen practices that should be punished. For example, here is a quotation from the Paenitentiale Theodori, attributed to Theodore of Tarsus,who held the position of Archbishop of Canterbury from 667 to 690. In chapter I. XV, De Cultura Idolorum (‘Concerning the worship of idols’), it states the punishments due for working divination and other Heathen-like spiritual activities: “If a woman has performed incantations or diabolical divinations, let her do penance for one year. About which it says in the canon: Those who observe auguries or auspices or dreams or any kind of divinations according to the customs of the heathens…(lists their punishments).” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magic_in_Anglo-Saxon_England#:~
The Influence of ‘The Future’
In many cases, especially when it comes to actions of the Gods, foresight or knowledge of the future has an impact on actions of the present, just as orlog from the past does, but it functions in a different way. The past has an existential influence on the present: that is, the past has existence, presence, weight, primal layers that have been spoken and laid, and cannot fail to shape the present. Does ‘the future’ have that same degree of weight, of influence, on what happens in the present?
When we look at this question closely, as it involves foresight, the role of ‘time’ becomes quite complex. Here are the steps that I see happening as the time-dynamics of foresight play out.
1) A future scenario is revealed to a person who is concerned with it. Let’s take Odin as an example: he is told about Ragnarök, and about Baldr’s death. These are events that ‘must be,’ that are wyrded to happen: they lie in Skuld’s domain.
2) Odin acquires this knowledge in his own ‘present time’ as the seeresses speak to him. He is becoming aware of what will happen in ‘the future’ but he obtains this knowledge during the present moment as he listens to the seeress. This is Verðandi’s domain of Becoming, of knowledge and awareness coming into being in Odin’s mind.
3) Once this knowledge becomes his, it ‘has-become,’ it is a completed fact. The knowledge has taken on existence in his awareness and has become layered within Odin’s personal orlog, along with its layering in the larger orlog of the Worlds. This is Urð’s domain of completed fact: the knowledge is embedded in Odin’s awareness and his orlog and is thereby influencing his choices and deeds, laying new layers of orlog.
4) Odin proceeds to take action in response to this awareness: he undertakes complex deeds and decisions to prepare for and respond to these events.
And here is my point: it is, in fact, Odin’s already completed knowledge, layered into orlog by that completion, which is driving his actions. His knowledge-hoard about the future now lies in his personal past and present, layered in his orlog, and his responses are being enacted in the present. The future itself is still not there, has not happened, and cannot—it seems to me—directly influence his deeds because it does not yet exist. The only link that lies between ‘the future’ and ‘Odin’s actions’ is the knowledge gained from foresight. The future here has no weight, no actuality or completeness, as ‘the past’ laid into orlog has. What is influencing Odin’s deeds is his knowledge, the way he has processed that knowledge and reacted to it, all of which has already been done and laid in the well of his mind and Urð’s Well.
So, back to the question: does ‘the future’ as revealed by foresight have the same weight, the same influence, on our choices and deeds as ‘the past’ does? In my view, it cannot, though I know there are others who believe that ‘the future’ does exist as objective fact, or perceive that ‘time does not exist.’ If these are true, then perhaps the future does have a comparable degree of influence…or perhaps the question becomes meaningless if ‘time does not exist.’ But as I see things, ‘the future’ can only influence us if we know, or think we know, what that future will be and react accordingly, and that knowledge is gained and processed in our ‘present’ and stored in our ‘past.’ Only then does it truly become part of our orlog, and grow forth from that orlog into our present deeds that will, eventually, shape our unknown future. ‘The future’ does not shape our present. The past shapes our present, and the present, as it reaches completion and becomes the past, simultaneously shapes the future through the layers of orlog that are laid.
Predestination
What I’ve spoken of so far relates to foresight, to a view of the future that a sentient being, like a human or a Deity, has achieved and its influence on their actions. What about actual predestination? Foresight sees ‘a future;’ there’s no absolute guarantee that this is the exact future that will happen, nor exactly when or how it will happen. Foresight, and even more the interpretation of foresight, can be mistaken. Predestination is pretty much solid: the Norns, Wyrd, or a Deity has said or arranged that something will happen, and it has to happen whether we’re aware of this looming event or not. Ancient Heathens generally believed that the time and circumstances of their death were predestined, whether they were foreseen or not.
A person might have a ‘destiny’ not directly related to their death, as well. The First Poem of Helgi Hundingsbani in the Poetic Edda foretells, in stirring poetry, the power and success of Helgi from the moment of his birth. Eagles scream and sacred waters pour down from heaven as Helgi is born. The Norns attach strands of fate, ørlögþöttu, across the lands that Helgi will rule, weaving them into his orlog, while ravens foretell his heroic life. This is clearly intended as a portrayal of predestination, and the rest of the poem shows how that predestination played out in Helgi’s life and deeds.
The difference I see between foresight and predestination seems to me a significant one from a philosophical standpoint. Foresight, and prophecy, simply means seeing what will happen; it does not necessarily imply control over those events. The seeress or völva who narrates the Völuspá isn’t making Ragnarök happen—she’s just foreseeing and foretelling it. It’s true that people in Germanic and other cultures often ‘blamed the messenger’ when a foreseeing or prophecy was unfavorable, imagining that the speaker of the prophecy was actually causing it to happen.
Seeresses and seers, völur and spákonur—people skilled at working with orlog—may be able, to some extent, to influence the shaping of orlog that they foresee. One can work with the strands of orlog that are coming into being, adding one’s influence to the multiplicity of whirling orlog-strands to nudge things in the direction one wants to go. But this involves ‘influence;’ it is not full-blown ‘causation.’ There is no certainty that all the details of one’s foreseeing are absolutely true, nor that one can fully shape the future as the Norns do. Even the Deities find that difficult or impossible, as we can see in the examples of Baldr’s death and Ragnarök that I discussed in the previous sections. What we, and the Deities, do is use whatever knowledge of the future we can gain to plan the best ways of meeting and dealing with that future, and nudge things in the direction that we want.
As opposed to foreseeing, which is descriptive, predestination is causative: it is causing something to happen in the future, which is not something that humans can do with full certainty. We can often cause something to happen in the present according to our intention: that is within our power. And we can schedule and plan things for the future that may well happen just as we had previously planned…but they may not. We may be able to predict how certain things will happen in the future if we have enough information to do so, but again that is not controlling the future.
Even when we undertake something with a completely predictable outcome, such as a well-understood scientific experiment or an engineering project, that outcome will happen in accordance with the laws of nature rather than being created out of our own will alone—that’s why it’s predictable. Predestination is done by the Norns / Wyrd / Deities purely by the exercise of their Will. Prediction is done by a good understanding of natural laws and other relevant factors.
For example, we can correctly predict that if we tip a glass of water upside down, the water will pour out. We control the experiment by tipping the glass, but the water pours out according to natural law: we do not create or control that law of gravity. We might hold up the glass and ‘foretell’ that “This water is destined to fall out when I tip this glass,” and then we do so, and it does. We are the proximate cause of the water spilling, by tipping the glass, but not the ultimate cause of the water falling, which is the law of gravity. We could not do the reverse and say “This water is destined to rise up out of this glass and fly around the room in the shape of a bird at 6pm this evening;” it wouldn’t happen simply by our will and declaration, because it contravenes natural laws.
We are often able to intend something and do much to make it happen, working with natural laws, human skill and will—and with esoteric and magical skills, too—to reach results that we intended and designed. We obviously influence the future by our deeds in the present—every one of us, in all kinds of ways—but we don’t have the ultimate, precise, willed control over future events that predestination implies, though some humans do have the ability to foresee what will happen. True predestination as the Norns and sometimes Deities enact it lies outside of human ability.
The Ambiguity of Time
Looking closely at predestination leads us again toward the ambiguity of the time element. The Norns ordain something to happen in the future, they predestine it. But ‘where,’ in time, is that action of theirs actually placed? They speak the words, carve the runes, that will bring into being a certain future act or situation, and they do that at a time that is ‘present’ at that moment of shaping. Then, having been spoken, been shaped, this act of predestination was laid into orlog: the substance of What-Is, what has been accomplished, otherwise known as ‘the past.’ From there, from its position in orlog and the past, it shapes events that are coming into being; this eventually results in the event that has been predestined. It is still the past, the layers of orlog working their way through the present like yeast fermenting in bread, which controls or conditions what happens in the present and leads to the predestined future.
In a way, we can see that the ancient concept of wyrd or orlog works backwards in time: orlog needs to arrange our life in such a way that we arrive at the time and circumstances of our death, our ‘orlog-while,’ according to a schedule that was laid in the past—or arrive at whatever other event was predestined. We can see this in the lore, because both ‘what has been laid in the past,’ and ‘the predestined future event’ are called by the same terms, orlog and wyrd, in the ancient writings. And both those words mean, linguistically, ‘what has been laid, what has become’ in terms of the past: orlog is ‘the primal, original layers;’ wyrd is ‘what has become, what is, what exists.’ Both of those shape or condition Verðandi’s ‘What-Is-Becoming’ and Skuld’s ‘What-Should-Be,’ the present and aspects of what we conceptualize as the future. But the impetus, the shaping power, is established in Urð’s or Wyrd’s ‘What-Is, which today we call ‘the past.’
This way of perceiving time and what occurs in time is, I believe, at least part of what Bauschatz was referring to when he wrote about “the binary opposition inherent in the Germanic tense system between past and present, or, better, between past and nonpast events. This particular opposition of action presents events in a way that is significantly different from our own, and from other Indo-European peoples” (p. xvii).
The assumption that ‘the future’ has great power over the present, inherent in our idea of ‘destiny’ that leads us into the future, is not clearly reflected in Germanic mythology and in ancient concepts of how time, actions, and events unfold. It is not that they had no idea of, nor interest in, what might happen in the future—of course they shared this common human concern. What is different, I believe, is the question of the agency of the future over the present.
Getting back to the question I asked earlier: does ‘the future’ have the same degree of weight, of influence, on what happens in the present as the past has, in old Germanic thought? I believe, based on the discussion here, that it does not. Both in the situation where foresight influences our present actions, and in the situation where the Norns secretly predetermine or predestine events yet to come, the effective agency that drives the actions in the present, leading toward the future, still lies in ‘the past.’ It lies in What-Is, which exists because it has been accomplished, has happened, and has entered into reality thereby—has been laid in the Well, and incorporated into the Tree. ‘The future’ has not done this and never will, until it becomes ‘the present’ and then ‘the past.’ By which time, of course, it is no longer ‘the future.’
I realize there are different views that can be taken about the existence, and thus influence, of ‘the future’ and of Time itself. Whether you agree or disagree with my arguments here, I hope they have stimulated your own thinking on these subjects. What I’ve laid out in my writings about the work of the Norns is what I understand from working with the old Germanic languages, myths, poetry, and ancient views of how the world works: views which I find both profound and inspiring, and which have shaped my Heathen path.
Note: This article is included in my book Orlog Yesterday and Today: The Shapings of the Norns.
Book-Hoard
Bauschatz, Paul C. The Well and the Tree: World and Time in Early Germanic Culture. The University of Massachusetts Press, 1982.
Dowden, Ken. European Paganism: The Realities of Cult from Antiquity to the Middle Ages. Routledge, 1999.
Erik the Red: The Saga of Erik the Red. J. Sephton, Icelandic Saga Database, Sveinbjorn Thordarson (ed.) http://www.sagadb.org/eiriks_saga_rauda.en
Larrington, Carolyne, transl. The Poetic Edda, revised edition. Oxford University Press, 2014.